Category Archives: Class G (all levels)

Lessons from Kasparov

Posted on by

What can we learn from the play of the strongest player of the last
century? His dynamism, industry, memory and willpower are all hugely
impressive, but can they be imitated successfully at all? I guess each
aspect of his game might inspire us, but there are instructive moments.

Opening

Kasparov had that restless drive for the initiative that we previously
saw with Alekhin. I was horrified when he destroyed Hubner as Black in a
line that I had seen as a fine way to suppress any Black initiative. I
expect that, at bottom, this is a case of falling behind in development,
but in a very modern setting.

Kasparov always chose openings that suited his style. Your style may be
different, but you must enjoy the openings you play. I thought his
adoption of the Tarrasch Defence in the early 1980s was very
interesting; perhaps positionally suspect because of the IQP, but, played
with activity and deep preparation, it held up all the way to the World Championship match.

Middlegame

Kasparov was the last player who should be allowed a concentration of
pieces on the side where you have castled. But on a busy board,
sometimes you might forget…

This is a fine sophisticated example of prophylaxis; work out what your
opponent wants to do, and do something about it. Here Kasparov
anticipates a White pawn break with f4-f5, which will open up the e-file
for the Black Rook on e8, and so White never quite gets around to it; the e5 break is similarly neutralised by Black’s waiting pieces.

Griffiths and Nunn advise that part of the gulf that separates masters
from the rest of us is dynamism. There may be a gulf too between the
super-GMs and other grandmasters. The notable move here is not the
thematic exchange sacrifice with …Rxc3, which doubtless White was
foolhardy to alllow, but …0-0. In a previous round, Van Wely had
refused to castle, perhaps fearing White’s attack, but Kasparov assessed
Black’s chances on the Queen’s-side as no worse.

Endgame

Kasparov’s dynamism is apparent even in defence, even in the endgame.
The major pieces do not like defending, and it can be worth abandoning a
pawn to get some active play.

For all his attacking verve, Kasparov can of course impose a strict
positional control when the position demands.

Lessons from Karpov

Posted on by

Karpov had a marked preference for positional play, although, in his own
words, “if my opponent offers sharp play, I do not object.” Karpov had
no soft spots that anyone could discern — an alleged weakness against
‘romantic’ openings was less of a handicap than the openings some chose
against him.

Opening

Karpov has always embraced the need for deep preparation. Here he digs
deep into a position that was all the rage at the time.

Something more typical of Karpov: an undogmatic treatment of a sharp attacking line.
Karpov often played to retain a small initiative with control, even when
playing attacking lines.

Middlegame

Karpov’s best games often have that air of inevitability about them that
we associate with Capablanca. Spassky handles IQP positions as well as
anybody, but Karpov takes his position apart here without allowing a
whisper of counterplay.

I’ve always liked Karpov’s willingness to sacrifice the exchange; he had
a keen feel for when the Rooks were more clumsy than capable.

Kasparov rather unwisely announced that the winner of Linares 1994 would be
considered ‘World Tournament Champion’. Challenge accepted… Karpov’s
victory there, twenty years after becoming world champion, was one of
the greatest of all time. On the way, he played the dry English Opening as though
he was Adolf Anderssen.

Endgame

A whole book has been written about Karpov’s endgame technique. Here is
one immaculate example from among many.

His greatest achievement in the endgame was likely this victory against
Kasparov. He deftly avoided a blockade of the position and showed the
agility of his Knight.

The field at Linares 1994 was one of the strongest ever, and Kasparov prior to the event commented that the winner could call himself “world champion of tournament chess”. Karpov’s reply was not recorded, unless it was his performance at the board, winning by a street, setting a tournament performance record and winning this game against the teenaged Topalov:

Lessons from Botvinnik

Posted on by

Odd, it took me a long while to write this page, but Botvinnik is the player from whose games I may have learned the most. Not just from his own notes: his game against Szilagyi has often been used as a model of dark-square play; the first chapter of Euwe’s Strategy and Tactics is mostly a long annotation to a game with Botvinnik; “Silman’s Thinking Technique” was expounded using a Botvinnik game. He took all aspects of chess to new levels, and wrote extensively about his play and research. Whatever point you want to make about how to play chess, there is a Botvinnik game to illustrate it.

Paul O’Neill has borrowed all my Botvinnik books, so these games have been scrabbled from the dusty corners of my memory…

Opening

[blockquote]
“If you play Botvinnik, it is even alarming to see him write his move down. Slightly short-sighted, he stoops over his scoresheet and devotes his entire attention to recording the move in the most beautifully clear script; one feels that an explosion would not distract him and that examined through a microscope not an irregularity would appear. When he wrote down 1.c2-c4 against me, I felt like resigning.”[br]
— Hugh ALEXANDER
[/blockquote]

At Moscow 1935, the wind from the East blew open the doors of chess. The new generation of Soviet masters could measure themselves against past Champions Lasker and Capablanca, and Flohr and Botvinnik, tying for first place, filled in their applications for a World Championship match. This is how Botvinnik dealt with Spielmann, who came fifth after the quartet of giants, in a game any junior could understand:

My adoption of the English Opening owed a lot to Botvinnik. I don’t know if it did me much good in the long run, but Botvinnik’s treatment was always something to aspire to. I often show this game to 1.e4 players, as you can get to an IQP position from many semi-open defences.

Middlegame

No great discovery, but what a display of power chess.

Silman’s long disquisition about planning based on White’s choice of 27th move is worth seeking out.

Endgame

The same willingness to commit to hard work and deep analysis is shown throughout Botvinnik’s endgames. We learned about how to play some endgames through Botvinnik’s games! His game with Minev is always cited in the chapter on Queen endings. Now the computer has worked it all out and we can pinpoint some errors on both sides, but MMB had to do it all from scratch. The win comes through keeping the two Kings on the same rank or a near ranks, so that harassing checks from the Black Queen can be met by White blocking with the Queen and giving check in return — a cross-check.

And this thriller against Kotov is a marvel of precision. The outstanding manoeuvre is retreating the Bishop from e4 to e6, recognising the importance of b3 and g8. Why is g8 important? Watch and see! It takes some errors from Kotov to lose this one, but very understandable.

And a last game showing his fighting spirit and pragmatism: